Assisted dying: All you need to know following the crunch Commons vote
Here, the PA news agency takes a look at the Bill and what happens next after a significant moment in its journey to become law.
– What is in the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill?
The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill has since been amended by a committee (Stefan Rousseau/PA)
The proposed legislation would allow terminally ill adults in England and Wales, with fewer than six months to live, to apply for an assisted death.
This would be subject to approval by two doctors and a panel featuring a social worker, senior legal figure and psychiatrist.
The terminally ill person would take an approved substance, provided by a doctor but administered only by the person themselves.
On Friday, MPs voted 314 to 291, majority 23, in favour of legalising assisted dying as they completed the mainstay of their work on the Bill.
It will now face further debate in the House of Lords.
– When would assisted dying be available if the Bill became law?
Kim Leadbeater is the MP behind the Bill (Jordan Pettitt/PA)
The implementation period has been doubled to a maximum of four years from royal assent, the point it is rubber stamped into law, rather than the initially suggested two years.
If the Bill was to pass later this year that would mean it might not be until 2029, potentially coinciding with the end of this Government's parliament, that assisted dying was being offered.
Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, who is the parliamentarian behind the Bill and put forward the extended timeframe, has insisted it is 'a backstop' rather than a target, as she pledged to 'hold the Government's feet to the fire' on implementing legislation should the Bill pass.
The extended implementation period was one of a number of changes made since the Bill was first introduced to the Commons back in October.
– What other changes have there been?
A High Court safeguard was scrapped during the committee process (Alamy/PA)
On Friday, MPs bolstered the Bill so people with eating disorders are ruled out of falling into its scope.
Another amendment, requiring ministers to report within a year of the Bill passing on how assisted dying could affect palliative care, was also approved by MPs.
Previously, a High Court safeguard was dropped, with the oversight of judges in the assisted dying process replaced with expert panels.
The change was much criticised by opponents, who said it weakened the Bill, but Ms Leadbeater has argued it strengthens it.
At the end of a weeks-long committee process earlier this year to amend the Bill, Ms Leadbeater said rather than removing judges from the process, 'we are adding the expertise and experience of psychiatrists and social workers to provide extra protections in the areas of assessing mental capacity and detecting coercion while retaining judicial oversight'.
Changes were also made to ensure the establishment of independent advocates to support people with learning disabilities, autism or mental health conditions and to set up a disability advisory board to advise on legal implementation and impact on disabled people.
Amendments added earlier this month during report stage in the Commons will also see assisted dying adverts banned if the Bill becomes law, and a prohibition on medics being able to speak to under-18s about assisted dying.
– Do we know much more about the potential impact of such a service coming in?
A Government impact assessment, published earlier this month, estimated that between 164 and 647 assisted deaths could potentially take place in the first year of the service, rising to between 1,042 and 4,559 in year 10.
The establishment of a Voluntary Assisted Dying Commissioner and three-member expert panels would cost an estimated average of between £10.9 million and £13.6 million per year, the document said.
It had 'not been possible' to estimate the overall implementation costs at this stage of the process, it added.
While noting that cutting end-of-life care costs 'is not stated as an objective of the policy', the assessment estimated that such costs could be reduced by as much as an estimated £10 million in the first year and almost £60 million after 10 years.
– Do healthcare staff have to take part in assisted dying?
Doctors will not have to take part in assisted dying (Lynne Cameron/PA)
It was already the case that doctors would not have to take part, but MPs have since voted to insert a new clause into the Bill extending that to anyone.
The wording means 'no person', including social care workers and pharmacists, is obliged to take part in assisted dying and can now opt out.
Amendments to the Bill were debated on care homes and hospices also being able to opt out but these were not voted on.
Ms Leadbeater has previously said there is nothing in the Bill to say they have to, nor is there anything to say they do not have to, adding on the Parliament Matters podcast that this is 'the best position to be in' and that nobody should be 'dictating to hospices what they do and don't do around assisted dying'.
– What will happen next?
MPs debated the Bill in the House of Commons (Malcolm Croft/PA)
Friday's vote in the Commons makes it more likely for the assisted dying Bill to become law, now that it has the backing of a majority of MPs.
But this is not guaranteed, and first it must continue on a journey through Parliament.
The Bill now heads to the House of Lords, as both Houses of Parliament must agree its final text before it can be signed into law.
During the next stages, peers are expected to put forward amendments to the Bill. If the Commons disagrees with these amendments, this will spark a process known as 'ping pong' which will continue until both Houses agree over its text.
– Will the Bill definitely become law?
There is a risk that the Bill could be stuck in a deadlock between the House of Commons and House of Lords, as it goes back and forth in disagreement.
If this continues until the current session of Parliament ends, then the Bill would fall.
Ms Leadbeater told journalists on Friday she hoped there were no attempts to purposefully wreck it by peers.
'I really hope there are no funny games, because the process has been extremely fair,' she said.
The Spen Valley MP said she did not know when the current parliamentary session would end, but suggested it could stretch into late 2025, giving her Bill the best part of six months to complete the full parliamentary process.
Speaking about the end of the session to reporters, Ms Leadbeater said: 'I am not imagining that is going to be imminently, but it could be before the end of the year.'
One member of the House of Lords, Bishop of London Dame Sarah Mullally, has already indicated she is against it.
The Church of England bishop said peers 'must oppose' the assisted dying Bill when it reaches them because of the 'mounting evidence that it is unworkable and unsafe'.
– What about assisted dying in the rest of the UK and Crown Dependencies?
The Isle of Man's parliament took its final vote in favour of assisted dying in March (Alamy/PA)
The Isle of Man looks likely to become the first part of the British Isles to legalise assisted dying, after its proposed legislation passed through a final vote of the parliament's upper chamber in March.
In what was hailed a 'landmark moment', members of the Scottish Parliament (MSPs) in May voted in favour of the Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill, backing its general principles.
It will now go forward for further scrutiny and amendments but will become law only if MSPs approve it in a final vote, which should take place later this year.
Any move to legalise assisted dying in Northern Ireland would have to be passed by politicians in the devolved Assembly at Stormont.
Jersey's parliament is expected to debate a draft law for an assisted dying service on the island for terminally ill people later this year.
With a likely 18-month implementation period if a law is approved, the earliest it could come into effect would be summer 2027.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Rhyl Journal
an hour ago
- Rhyl Journal
United Ireland should be new state that ‘can be better for all of us'- Varadkar
Leo Varadkar also said he hopes the current Irish government takes the decision to establish a forum to lead discussions on unity, and also appeared to dismiss concerns of potential loyalist violence in reaction to a united Ireland. Mr Varadkar, who stood down as taoiseach in April last year, said he believes he will see a united Ireland in his lifetime but warned it is not inevitable. He said that he has had no regrets so far since leaving elected politics, and is enjoying both 'a lot of personal and intellectual freedom to say what I think'. He was speaking at an In Conversation event with Rev Karen Sethuraman at St Mary's University college in west Belfast, hosted by Feile an Phobail and Ireland's Future. Former Sinn Fein president and West Belfast MP Gerry Adams was among those in the audience for the event. Mr Varadkar stressed that a united Ireland 'has to be a new Ireland that is better for everyone'. 'That includes a bill of rights, guarantees civil protections and liberties,' he said. 'Unification, in my view, is not the annexation of six more counties by the Republic of Ireland. It's a new state and one that can be better for all of us, an opportunity that only comes around every 100 years, which is to design your state and design your constitution.' In terms of what the current Irish Government is doing, Mr Varadkar described the Shared Island Unit, which was set up when he was Taoiseach, as really positive. But he said he would like to see the Irish Government lead a forum ahead of unity. 'Just saying it as an aspiration isn't enough anymore, it should be an objective and an objective is something you act on,' he said. 'One of the ideas that I would put forward, which could help to move on this discussion, is the establishment of some sort of forum.' He said there was the New Ireland Forum in the 1980s, and the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation in the 1990s. 'I think there is a strong case now for us to convene the parties that are interested in talking about this, unions, business groups, civil society in a forum to have that discussion, but I don't see how that can happen if that isn't led by the Irish Government, and I hope at some point during the course of this five-year government, a decision will be taken to do that,' he said. Meanwhile, asked how he felt potential violent opposition to a united Ireland could be handled, Mr Varadkar suggested he felt 'only a very small minority may turn to violence'. 'I know there are people south of the border who, when I talk to them about reunification, express to me concerns that there might be a very small minority within unionism who may turn to violence,' he said. 'I don't think we should dismiss that as a possibility. I don't think it will happen, to be honest. 'In two referendums, both north and south, people would be very clearly giving their preference as to what should happen, it would be quite a different situation to when partition happened 100 years ago and it wasn't voted for. 'I don't think that would arise but I think it's a reasonable question.' Meanwhile, deputy First Minister Emma Little-Pengelly suggested Mr Varadkar was 'wrong in terms of the trajectory' towards a united Ireland, insisting the number of people voting for nationalist parties, around 40%, 'hasn't moved since 1998'. Mr Varadkar said he was in politics long enough to not respond to someone else's comments without hearing them in full, but said the case he is making is not just based on the percentage of people who vote for nationalist parties, adding it is clear the percentage voting for unionist parties has fallen. Earlier, Mr Varadkar visited nearby Colaiste Feirste where he heard about the growth in Irish medium education, and plans to build a new Irish Language Heritage and Interpretive Centre, An Spas Din. School principal Micheal Mac Giolla Ghunna said: 'We have grown a vibrant Irish language community from our base in the Gaeltacht Quarter, leading to challenges for us in terms of accommodation and teacher provision. 'But far from limiting our ambitions, we are now using the Sportlann facility and initiatives like our GaelStair heritage project to offer our pupils and the wider community further opportunities.'
Rhyl Journal
an hour ago
- Rhyl Journal
Assisted dying law closer but MPs' support narrows in historic vote
Kim Leadbeater described backing for her Bill in the Commons as 'a convincing majority', after the number was slashed from 55 in November to 23 on Friday. The Labour MP declared 'thank goodness' after the result, but hospices are among those warning of the 'seismic change' for end-of-life care. Staunch supporter Dame Esther Rantzen, who is terminally ill but has said a new law is unlikely to come in time for her, thanked MPs for doing their bit to protect terminally ill people from a 'bad death'. She told the PA news agency: 'This will make a huge positive difference, protecting millions of terminally ill patients and their families from the agony and loss of dignity created by a bad death. 'Thank you, Parliament.' While 314 MPs voted for the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill at third reading, 291 voted against. Some 14 MPs switched from voting in favour to against, while only one MP – Labour's Jack Abbott – switched from voting no to voting yes. The proposed legislation will now move to the House of Lords for further debate and votes, although one peer has already urged her colleagues they 'must oppose a law that puts the vulnerable at risk'. Bishop of London Dame Sarah Mullally, a former chief nursing officer for England, said instead work is needed to better fund access to 'desperately needed palliative care services'. Her sentiment was echoed by a range of end-of-life care organisations including Marie Curie, which said legalising assisted dying will make it 'more crucial than ever' for governments across the UK 'ensure that there is palliative care available for anyone who needs it'. Ahead of the vote, MPs approved a change to the Bill, which will require ministers to assess within a year of any new law coming into effect the quality and distribution of palliative care services currently available and the impact of an assisted dying service on them. The charity said while it welcomed the change, 'this will not on its own make the improvements needed to guarantee everyone is able to access the palliative care they need'. Ms Leadbeater said the vote result was one that 'so many people need', insisting her Bill has enough safeguards and will 'give dying people choice'. Asked about the narrower gap between supporters and opponents, Ms Leadbeater said she knew there would be 'some movement both ways' but insisted the vote showed a 'convincing majority'. She told reporters: 'The will of the House (of Commons) will now be respected by the Lords, and the Bill will go through to its next stage.' Acknowledging those who remain opposed to the Bill, she said she is 'happy to work with them to provide any reassurance or if they've got any questions about the Bill that they want to talk through with me, my door has always been open and remains open'. Conservative MP Danny Kruger, who opposes the Bill, said support 'is ebbing away very fast', telling of his disappointment the Bill passed but adding: 'The fact is, their majority's been cut in half.' Campaigners wept, jumped and hugged each other outside Parliament as the vote result was announced, while some MPs appeared visibly emotional as they left the chamber. Others lined up to shake hands with Ms Leadbeater, the Bill's sponsor through the Commons, with some, including Home Office minister Jess Phillips, stopping to hug the Spen Valley MP. Before a Bill can be signed into law, both the Lords and the Commons must agree the final text. Thanks to the four-year implementation period, it could be 2029 – potentially coinciding with the end of this Government's parliament – before assisted dying is offered. Encouraging or assisting suicide is currently against the law in England and Wales, with a maximum jail sentence of 14 years. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer remained supportive of the Bill, voting yes on Friday as he had done last year. Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch, who had urged MPs to vote against the legislation, describing it as 'a bad Bill' despite being 'previously supportive of assisted suicide', voted no. During an hours-long date on Friday, MPs on both sides of the issue recalled personal stories of loved ones who had died. Conservative former minister Sir James Cleverly, who led the opposition to the Bill in the Commons, spoke of a close friend who died 'painfully' from cancer. He said he comes at the divisive issue 'not from a position of faith nor from a position of ignorance', and was driven in his opposition by 'concerns about the practicalities' of the Bill. MPs had a free vote on the Bill, meaning they decided according to their conscience rather than along party lines. The proposed legislation would allow terminally ill adults in England and Wales, with fewer than six months to live, to apply for an assisted death, subject to approval by two doctors and a panel featuring a social worker, senior legal figure and psychiatrist.
Rhyl Journal
an hour ago
- Rhyl Journal
ADHD waiting list led to rise in unregulated private providers
The ADHD taskforce, commissioned by NHS England with the support of the Government, has published an interim report saying the system for diagnosing and managing ADHD needs to be overhauled. At the moment, ADHD assessment and treatment in England is provided by highly specialised doctors in secondary care. But the report warned: 'Inability to access NHS services has led to a significant growth in the use of private providers that are not regulated, resulting in two-tier access to services, diagnosis and treatment; one for those who can pay and another for those who cannot. 'This drives health inequalities and links to disproportionate impacts and outcomes in the education and justice systems, employment and health.' Experts behind the study said waiting times for NHS ADHD services 'have escalated and are unacceptably long' and demand on services is 'very likely' to continue to rise. The taskforce concluded that ADHD is not solely the remit of the NHS and other health providers, with schools being vital for identifying and meeting needs at an early stage. And while a clinical diagnosis of ADHD via the NHS is required if a person needs medication, early support can still be provided to others. The report said: 'We need timely recognition and early support of suspected ADHD and neurodivergence across all settings. 'This is especially important in schools and the early years, to prevent adverse impacts and costly outcomes in the future. This should be needs-led and not require a clinical diagnosis.' The report also suggested there is no evidence of over-diagnosis of ADHD in the UK. It argued: 'England and the rest of the UK have much lower service recognition and treatment rates of ADHD diagnosis compared with other European countries. 'Recent data show a very high level of under-recognition and under-treatment of strictly diagnosed ADHD, with significant inequalities in access to care.' The report also addressed concerns about potential 'over-medicalisation and over-diagnosis', including worries that people are self-diagnosing ADHD based on information from social media. However, the report, said that 'currently there is no good evidence on what percentage of those waiting to see a clinician have self-diagnosed ADHD using social media and eventually meet or do not meet ADHD diagnostic criteria after a high-quality assessment. 'We only know currently that in England, recognised rates of ADHD are lower than the expected prevalence of ADHD.' Currently, the estimated economic costs of not treating ADHD are around £17 billion to the UK economy, the report went on. This includes through lower tax contributions, people needing state benefits and more likely to be not in education, employment or training, or who are long-term unemployed. 'Many of these costs are avoidable, as with appropriate, early support, people with ADHD can thrive,' it said. Professor Anita Thapar, chair of the ADHD Taskforce, said: 'The recommendations put forward by the taskforce will require action across Government and cross-sector organisations to make the necessary changes to improve the lives of people with ADHD. 'We need to get this right, to make sure people get early diagnosis and support, not just in the NHS but across society.' Dr Adrian James, NHS England's medical director for mental health and neurodiversity, said: 'We know that too many people with ADHD have been waiting for too long for support, which is why we launched the taskforce last year to help respond to the significant growth in the need for care. 'It is clear that much more needs to be done to improve ADHD assessment and care in England and ensure people can get a timely diagnosis, and we welcome the findings from the interim report, and look forward to its final conclusions later this year.' A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said: 'Lord Darzi's report into the state of the NHS laid out how severe the delays have become for people waiting for an attention deficit hyperactivity disorder diagnosis. 'We welcome the publication of the ADHD Taskforce's interim report, which provides valuable insights into the challenges affecting those with ADHD, including access to services and support.' The NHS has launched publicly-available data collection on ADHD referrals and waiting times to help local teams better understand how they are performing. By March 2026, the Government also aims for six in 10 pupils to have access to a mental health support team in school.
